Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 7th Mar 2009 05:43 UTC
Multimedia, AV Geeks.com, known for their cheap digital cameras, sent us in the Kodak EasyShare Z1485 IS, a 14 megapixel digital camera with a 720p HD video recording capability. Geeks also threw in a Peak 8 GB Class 6 SDHC card to properly test the camera's HD capability. We are taking the camera for a spin, and we have a small HD video shot for your own evaluation.
Order by: Score:
So what?
by fonebone on Sat 7th Mar 2009 09:23 UTC
fonebone
Member since:
2005-10-05

This is nothing special really. If you want a compact camera with HD movie capabilities, rather go for the Panasonic DMC TZ5. It's been out for ages, it has a 10x optical zoom, a quality lens from Leica and IS.

The megapixels don't mean a thing when you have a tiny sensor anyway.

Reply Score: 3

RE: So what?
by Eugenia on Sat 7th Mar 2009 09:28 UTC in reply to "So what?"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

Oh, I agree. But the TZ5 is also an extra $100. It's all about the right product for the right price, not what's best in general. Cause then, the Canon 5D MarkII is even better than the TZ5 anyway. ;-)

Edited 2009-03-07 09:29 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: So what?
by fonebone on Sat 7th Mar 2009 09:31 UTC in reply to "RE: So what?"
fonebone Member since:
2005-10-05

Sure, but that's not really a fair comparison. The Canon costs thousands of dollars more, while the Kodak and the Panasonic are aimed at the same market.

Edited 2009-03-07 09:39 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: So what?
by Eugenia on Sat 7th Mar 2009 10:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So what?"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

Almost same market. The price is not as close as you think it is. I know people who don't have the extra $100 to pay for a higher up model as the TZ5 is. Maybe 100 bucks for you is not a big deal, but for some it is.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: So what?
by pandronic on Sat 7th Mar 2009 10:22 UTC in reply to "RE: So what?"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

Do you happen to know if the TZ5 has any other options than continuous auto-focus when filming? That would be a big plus for the extra 100$

Edited 2009-03-07 10:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: So what?
by Eugenia on Sat 7th Mar 2009 10:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So what?"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

I believe it has a tele/macro/auto mode, but I can't be sure for this model exactly. What I know that it has for sure over this Kodak one is exposure locking and compensation (talking about video mode, always). Additionally, the quality is better as the Panasonics record in MJPEG at 25mbps rather than MPEG4-SP at 12 mbps.

However, if I were to go for a digicam that shoots good HD video for less than $350, my actual suggestions would be either the Panasonic FX150 (also supports 24p which I personally prefer for some things), or the new Canon SX200. More info in the two pages here: http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?p=181306#post181306

Edited 2009-03-07 10:33 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: So what?
by pandronic on Sat 7th Mar 2009 14:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: So what?"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

The new SX200 looks quite appealing: 1080x720 at 30fps, 12x optical zoom and a lot more: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SX200IS/SX200ISDAT.HTM

Still the FX150 only has 3.6 optical zoom and a little higher video res (1280x720). http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/FX150/FX150A.HTM

Given the fact that they are in the same price range, the Canon looks like a no-brainer. Am I missing something?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: So what?
by Eugenia on Sat 7th Mar 2009 20:29 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: So what?"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

The FX150 is a better deal if you are after the movie look because it does 24p. Also, it displays way faster than h.264 while editing, so if you are on a PC, it's the best idea compared to the SX200. More over, it has a bigger sensor, so it is better on low light and it has more background blur, adding to that movie look that some of us are after. So don't discount the FX150 just yet.

Reply Score: 2

hm
by SK8T on Sat 7th Mar 2009 11:18 UTC
SK8T
Member since:
2006-06-01

mh, quality of the images is really poor. looks like upscaled.

Reply Score: 2

Still waiting
by CodeMonkey on Sat 7th Mar 2009 13:08 UTC
CodeMonkey
Member since:
2005-09-22

I'm still waiting for a sub $1000 harddisk based camcorder that will do progressive HD. All the ones in that range so far have been interlaced. It has been interesting to see many of the still cameras begin to get this technology but unfortunately it's not too useful with the limited storage capacity of the flash memory.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Still waiting
by Eugenia on Sat 7th Mar 2009 20:30 UTC in reply to "Still waiting"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

ALL of Canon's HD cameras do PF30, which is 30p in a 60i wrapper. If you are using iMovie, or Sony Vegas, you can easily discard one of the two fields and be left with a perfectly progressive (not interpolated or blended) image. The HG20 and HG21 are also hard drive based as you want, so that's the camera you want I guess. If you are after 60p instead, there's a new Sanyo Xacti flash-based one that does that.

Edited 2009-03-07 20:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2